There is a discussion on Twitter about project failures in the #NoEstimates thread. I work for a "root cause analysis" division of the Office of Secretary of Defense. The notion of a "root cause" is many times confused with "issues" that are the source of the Root Cause.
The article about the failure of the Queensland health payment system, speaking about the sympotoms.
There needs to be Five Whys applied to the statement
... has found that the the project’s difficulties were caused by woeful project scope definition at the project’s commencements, as well as poor governance throughout, with all three key parties involved — Queensland Health, Corptech and IBM — significantly underestimating the scope of the work required.
Why?
- Why was the scope woefully managed?
- Why was the scope siginifcantly underestimated?
- Why was the management process not corrected?
- Why was the correction processes not sufficient to protect the project?
- Why ...
It is nearly trival to provide examples of project failure. To show the outcomes of that failure. To point out the symptoms of the project's failure mode. The classic statement we're looking for dysfunction is nearly the lamest statement around. School childern can look for dysfunction, it's absolutley trival to do this.
How about effective, sustainable, verifiable, corrective actions? Oh that's not my job I'm just here to seek out dysfunction, that's your job. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
Time to get real here. If #NoEstimates wants to claim the method for improved project performance, time to come up with some measureable corrective actions to all the problems we know about of writing softare for money.
As Woody says in Zombiland Time to Nut Up or Shut Up
